Here's another "I said it first..."

I don't even know this guy, but he says it (Rob Diamond) more clearly than I do:

"If you have been able to pull yourself away from the Olympics, you may have noticed that an entire branch of our federal government has shut down--and it is not due to Washington, D.C.'s record snowfall. I am talking specifically about our Congress, and its inability to pass any legislation on the critical issues facing the country today: jobs, financial regulatory reform, clean energy, and, oh yeah, health care reform.

"Now to be fair, it is not the entire Congress, just the Senate. The House has actually passed a bill on almost every one of these important topics. But the Senate has come to a complete and total stop, and it is due to one thing and one thing only--the Republican Party has made the scandalous decision to shut down the legislative branch in a time of national crisis."

I told you so...

Robert Reich says this so much better than me.

"The problem is the intransigence and belligerence that has taken over Congress and much of the rest of the public -- a profound distrust of people "on the other side," an unwillingness to compromise, a bitterness and anger disproportionate to issues being discussed.

"Anger makes good television, but it's fake and it teaches Americans the wrong lessons. Anger also can win elections (Senate Republicans haven't given Obama any votes because they've been eyeing the 2010 midterms since he took office, hoping for a rerun of 1994), but partisan anger is just as fake, and it undermines the capacity of our democracy to do the public's business."

I told you so.

I can hear the boots in the distance...

Ok. I'm nervous. The Conservatives have come out with their "Statement for the 21st Century." I can hear the thunder of marching boots in the distance. The basic position is we should change back to the constitution. Fantastic strategy. It offers change, something everyone wants, and it implies what we are currently doing is unconstitutional, or evil.
What will never be communicated directly, thus missing a majority of Americans, is that they are going to define for you what the Constitution says, and they promise you it will be just like it was when you were a little child and had no problems in the world. The former is scary to me and why does the latter remind me of the witch in "Hansel and Gretel?"
What I have done is put the complete statement in block quotes. Inside the block quotes I have italicized words that concern me. In bold letters are my comments and thoughts. Tell me what you think.

The Mount Vernon Statement Constitutional Conservatism: A Statement for the 21st Century
We recommit ourselves to the ideas of the American Founding. [Keep in mind, everyone wants this. It is a good emotional statement with no material content. What were the ideas of the "American Founding" in your mind? Mine is peace and the pursuit of happiness.] Through the Constitution, the Founders created an enduring framework of limited government [Not really. The South lost that argument when the Confederation was rejected for the Federalist Constitution.] based on the rule of law. They sought to secure national independence, provide for economic opportunity, establish true religious liberty and maintain a flourishing society [Where did this come from?] of republican self-government.
These principles define us as a country and inspire us as a people. They are responsible for a prosperous, just nation unlike any other in the world. They are our highest achievements, serving not only as powerful beacons to all who strive for freedom and seek self-government, but as warnings to tyrants and despots everywhere.
Each one of these founding ideas is presently under sustained attack. [Which ones? national independence? Economic opportunity? True religious liberty ? (Maybe the Muslims.) Flourishing society?] In recent decades, America's principles have been undermined and redefined in our culture, our universities and our politics. [Probably true. Slaves were freed, women can vote. That's why they call it democracy. We can redefine ourselves every day. We are free to do that.] The selfevident truths of 1776 have been supplanted by the notion that no such truths exist. The federal government today ignores the limits of the Constitution, which is increasingly dismissed as obsolete and irrelevant. [No. The Supreme Court has that responsibility. Lawyer Meese and the others know that so why do they include this other than an emotional barb.]
Some insist that America must change, cast off the old and put on the new. But where would this lead -- forward or backward, up or down? Isn't this idea of change an empty promise or even a dangerous deception?
The change we urgently need, a change consistent with the American ideal, is not movement away from but toward our founding principles. At this important time, we need a restatement of Constitutional conservatism grounded in the priceless principle of ordered liberty [There is your first subtle fascist comment.] articulated in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.
The conservatism of the Declaration asserts self-evident truths based on the laws of nature and nature's God. It defends life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It traces authority to the consent of the governed. It recognizes man's self-interest but also his capacity for virtue.
The conservatism of the Constitution limits government's powers but ensures that government performs its proper job effectively. It refines popular will through the filter of representation. [This is true. BUT, that is the second subtle fascist comment.] It provides checks and balances through the several branches of government and a federal republic.
A Constitutional conservatism unites all conservatives through the natural fusion provided by American principles. It reminds economic conservatives that morality is essential to limited government, [I don't even know what this means.] social conservatives that unlimited government is a threat to moral self-government, [No correlation. You can have a moral despot and immoral anarchy.] and national security conservatives that energetic but responsible government is the key to America's safety [In other words, war is the pursuit of happiness.] and leadership role in the world.
A Constitutional conservatism based on first principles provides the framework for a consistent and meaningful policy agenda.

• It applies the principle of limited government based on the rule of law to every proposal. [We all support that.]
• It honors the central place of individual liberty in American politics and life. [We all support that.]
• It encourages free enterprise, the individual entrepreneur, and economic reforms grounded in market solutions. [You got to be crazy to support this. That is what got us into this mess.]
• It supports America's national interest in advancing freedom and opposing tyranny in the world and prudently considers what we can and should do to that end. [Uhmm, I don't know about this. Sounds imperialistic. I'd just as soon other countries choose their own way unless they are a real threat to us. But then again, I feel some moral responsibility toward Darfur. I wonder if these guys do?]
• It informs conservatism's firm defense of family, neighborhood, community, and faith. [Don't know what this means. Sounds good.]

If we are to succeed in the critical political and policy battles ahead, we must be certain of our purpose. [We are certain of one thing: you're mad and you are not getting your way. Join the club. Everyone is mad. No one is getting their way.]
We must begin by retaking and resolutely defending the high ground of America's founding principles. [Gimme a break.]
February 17, 2010

There you have it. Sounds good, but if you read between the lines, its a little scary. It is scary because it is fairly sugar coated for the mindless but it asserts itself as having the righteous answer. Think about it. The Nazis started with the premise that "they" did this to us, "they" being big business and the people they control in government. And that the Nazis know how to lead us back to the better times we used to enjoy. Who signed up first? The loud mouthed bullies. Then the mindless masses that just wanted relief from recession and inflation. The Nazis bolstered national pride, Germany for Germans. It all sounds so familiar.

Could it be that easy?

Some friends of mine went to a county Teaparty organizing event this week. I was really surprised they would go but they are politicians at heart. Whenever there is a group of people gathered, they want to be there. It's always good to meet new faces and greet old faces.

So I asked them why they went. "You're awful conservative, but your not that conservative."

"We were invited."

Oh. Hmmm.

So, I make the mistake of charging into a lecture about "wingnuts", no ideology, lunatic fringe, etc. That was bad on my part, but at times it is hard to contain myself.

My good friend says, "They are against all incumbents."

That can't be bad. After all, we live in Texas. So I say. "I am too! But, teabaggers?"

"Maybe we can change our name" he says.

"Let me see if I got this right. The guy invites you to his "Teabagger" organizing party and your first suggestion is that you don't identify yourselves with the Tea Party movement? That's like you going to a bachelor party and deciding to call it a wake."

Well, my friend is on a policy research committee for the county Tea Party organization that may become a wake. I don't know what policy he is researching. Really didn't want to know. My other friend said he didn't know if he was going to join. He will. Especially if one important Republican steps into their ranks.

I puzzled over it all night. You might say I worried. What's this world coming to? Then I remembered something that happened to me a long time ago.

I worked with a county public health district one time. In this particular county we had a small rural settlement of maybe a hundred and fifty folks. In a short period of time a number of folks had died of pancreatic cancer. Of course in that small village, everybody knew each other. So quickly, fear rose up in the settlement that something was wrong in their environment and they were going to have more cases of pancreatic cancer. They came to the Health District for answers.

We researched the question and found no particular anomaly in the incidence of pancreatic cancer. They were having no more or no fewer people dying of pancreatic cancer over the past fifty years than anywhere else in the state.

"Do you know we have high power lines running through the town?"

"What?"

"We have high power lines running through the town and you know what they do."

"No. What do they do?"

"They give off radiation and that causes cancer."

"I don't think so. There is no documented study that finds a correlation between magnetic radiation emitted by high power lines and pancreatic cancer."

I wish I could have taken those words back. I could have said any number of things but that was probably the worst. Now the citizens believed there was a government cover up and that they were going to be the next to die so we could rid ourselves of witnesses. They went on to the State.

I figured good. Let the State resolve this issue. But they didn't. I get a call that the State Health Officer is setting a public hearing on the issue to be held in our meeting room. The whole town was invited to give testimony.

So, the hearing day comes around and the meeting room fills. The State Health Officer himself decides to attend. I figure this is going to be a long day and nobody is going to win.

As fate, and human nature, would have it, the town had a spokesperson. Normal people are shy and unfamiliar with the ways of government. They know when something is wrong, but they are afraid to articulate it for themselves in front of a crowd. So let the one that wants to talk do it for you.

The spokesperson gets up and starts to tell the State Health Officer about the number of people who have died in their small town, what percentage of them that died of pancreatic cancer. The spokesperson now begins to strengthen her arguments with embellishments that she thinks is helping her cause but probably isn't. She starts telling the Health Officer about tin foil on her TV, her TV turning itself on and off, and how her husband turns the TV off and on by leaving the room to go to the refrigerator or bathroom. No switching. Just on and off.

"That must prove to you the powers of the radiation that comes off these lines. Its clear as the time the aliens took me. But that's another story from another time."

"What?"

"What What?"

"What did you just say?" says the Health Officer.

"You mean about the aliens? I was abducted one time but I'm not here to discuss that."

Hearing closed. Issue over. Citizens scratching their heads, looking at their spokesperson like she just came down with pancreatic cancer. Elvis has left the building.

Why do I go into that story? I believe there are more normal people than there are wingnuts. I believe that all of us have a little wingnut in us and it scares us. I want to "vote the bastards out." I want lower taxes. I want less rules telling me what I want to do. I want all the things teabaggers want, but I also have a rational mind that says we have some responsibility for each other so we can all be better off.

What I think will happen is that teabaggers are going to draw a lot of people into it like my friends. But they are going to get in and look around and begin to feel a little creepy and then slowly disappear back into the world of normalcy. I'll keep you posted. So goes my friends, so goes the world of teabaggery.

Here's a chilling thought:

First, since "Watergate," I believe most of our social and political life has been shaped by what the media tells us is important. And trust me, few of us understand how uninformed they are or what their motives are. I have spent enough time in front of the media to realize few grasp complex issues (though they willingly write or talk like they do) and most of them are looking past this story to the next one that will propel them into the next larger market. They are not the better informed warm individual that paints your world for you each day. That is stage persona. That's what got them in front of the camera.

Well, if you believe me that they are not as informed as you think and their motives are somewhat self serving, what is good for them? CONFLICT! Whether it be war, rape, or two neighbors fighting, that gives them a story and a chance for the "big story." They will paint the conflict as large as they can. Makes them important. You need them on TV to tell you about it.

Rahm Emmanuel tells a working group of his that funneling money toward ads castigating the "Blue Dogs" is retarded. It is. So naturally, the slang term of "retarded" has become a slur word denigrating (can you use that word?) mentally handicapped persons. A person at the meeting takes that to the media, he or she takes that to Sarah Palin, and Palin lets out one of her famous Facebook posts, Emanuel should be fired. You would think that was enough.

Week later, Limbaugh, unable to help himself (rather, he does that very well) he uses the "r" word. Media goes pack to Palin. What do you think about that, they ask. No one should use that word, she says. Here's the kicker! What's the story? PALIN SLAMS LIMBAUGH! Where did that come from? Out of the media person's desire to create great news.

I have little respect for Palin. I think she is nothing more than an opportunist. Rake in the money while the raking is good. That's Palin. But this is just a small example of what the media is doing to all of us.

What's my point? There is obviously an unprecedented conflict between Republicans and Democrats. There is conflict on so many levels between parties, within parties, between parties and independents. The media is having a field day. Its been so good for them that news stations devote 24 hours a day to it. (Any of you old enough to remember when the national news was 15 minutes long?) This is so large that bloggers have matured into another nearly respected news source.

I have had this fear that our nation is going to be overwhelmed by populists and that will be a very short step to fascism, i.e. we better all start thinking alike or we are the problem. I have this fear that the populists will sacrifice the rights of individual thinkers to get conformity to their thinly thought out logic.

Now here is my new concern. I truly hope I am just having a paranoid day or I'm just stupid. There are a lot of intelligent people out there that see the potential disaster of this populism. What if they preempt them? What if the Democrats see a populist movement growing on mis-information and sensationalism from the media? What if the Republican party sees power taken from them by populists pushing out establishment leaders? Could this lead to a government clamp down on the free press? Could we loose our access to information and the right to free speech in the name of saving our nation from fascism?

I know. Bizarre. Just having a bad day. Think about it. One thing I am sure about. Conflict is escalating every day. Escalate means increase. The most is physical conflict.

Another bad day for us....

When I say "us" I don't mean liberal, conservative, teabagger, or progressive. I don't mean Democrat or Republican. I'm none of those things. And I'm all of them. I certainly have day's when I say "vote all the bastards out." Guess that makes me a teabagger. Then I have days when I fear unions will run this country and I know how evil they can be. But most days I believe everyone in this incredible nation should have the right to a good quality of life (even at the cost of some of my good fortune.)

But this blog is not about me. Its about the world around us at this point in time. We. citizens of the U. S. had another bad day. The recession clumps along. The DOW went below 10,000 today before it came back up (barely). Unemployment numbers are down below 10% but that was because the most new hires were temporary workers.

So, even though they tell us the worst is over, we don't really believe it. What we do believe is that our "promise for change" won't lead, the Senate is at a standstill, and the only way you make a new friend is if you can agree on who you are going to hate.

The teabaggers are starting their convention today and right of the box, the first speaker recommends a literacy test to qualify for voting. Another time and this man would be booed off the stage, but there in Nashville, he is receiving positive applause. It's ironic to me because I think a lot of teabaggers wouldn't pass the test.

The Republican Senate has put a "hold" on all of the Presidents nominees to fill his administrative positions, thus locking any sense of leadership in the bureaucracy. There was one appointment passed this week after being nominated nine months ago. I guess the Republicans want to show some bipartisan cooperation.

The Republicans have also gone rabid on the President's budget that was delivered to Congress. Naturally, they oppose it and stress that it is a jobs killer. They feel so strong that they are developing a "shadow" budget to show people they offer an alternative. The funny thing about that, the "shadow" budget recommends slashing medicare and privatizing social security. When that got out, all of the Republican leadership distanced themselves from it until they see the finished product. Afterall, they brought healthcare to a halt because they argued it cut medicare, endangering their elderly loved ones. There is no doubt in my mind there will never be a finished product. What the Republicans have managed to do so well since they became a minority is to do nothing. That way they can not be criticized. While at the same time they can devote all their energy on criticizing anything that comes out of the Democrat camp. It's a good formula for success.

The jobs bill has also been introduce to Congress. It's now in the Senate. Guess what? The Republicans are threatening to filibuster it. Its going to be dead. A bill designed to create jobs during the worst recession since the Great Depression, and they are going to kill it with a filibuster.

Does the average citizen know that the filibuster has been used more in the past year than it has from 1950 to 2009? government is at a standstill. We, all of us, are being held hostage, until the Republican establishment party, gets its way and gets back the majority. This is democracy? Get rid of the filibuster, or modify it to something more reliable. Put a time limit on them. Do something. Things are falling apart.